Snapshot: The Problem Of Christianity

snowsheep

On the Right, anger rises over Christianity. Too often, Christians are seen paying lip service to conservative values, and then either going Leftist or adopting a stance of passive resignation, congratulating themselves on their moral sacrifice while letting the disaster gain strength around them.

In the former, Christians confuse the “universality” of Christianity — that there is an order of God which applies to some degree to all individuals — with universalism, or the idea that this order applies identically to all individuals, the same way they misunderstand equality to mean zero hierarchy.

Like the original idea of equality, Christian universality was originally intended to mean that all people are given the same chance to rise above themselves. Unfortunately, there are two glitches: as Baron Evola points out, written religions quickly become universalist because they confuse the exoteric with the esoteric, and people will naturally re-interpret any concept of “same chances” as “same outcomes” because it flatters their egos.

Thus, we find a design flaw in Christianity… the Word is its own enemy because its meaning crumbles under the onslaught of individualistic interpretations. Some say the solution is Catholicism, but this makes the problem worse by providing a centralized area of interpretation which is then gamed like any other political resource. In fact, our current Pope who has more in common with Communism than Christ is proof of this.

The pagans laugh at this, but ignore a problem in their own approach. By not writing anything down, they guaranteed that it would be lost instead of corrupted, but this is more a function of its declining popularity than the method of “graceful failure” designed into it. Christianity won because it had basically the same values and could be spread easily to larger groups.

In fact, it might make sense to view Christianity as a superior spiritual technology. Its simplified nature makes it perfect for groups, and by making people act in unison, it can be a powerful mass motivator. This strength is also its weakness, because when it becomes corrupted, it encourages insanity just as strongly.

However, this problem is not found in Christianity, but in the nature of mass motivation itself. Any sufficiently motivating force will be misinterpreted because individuals interpret rules, words and symbols in the manner most beneficial to the individual, that is, closest to “anarchy with grocery stores.”

Centralization fails for this reason, or at least is only part of the puzzle. Christianity in history represented a bubble, first gaining great strength, and then losing it once the Christian idea — the burden on each individual to get right with God — became hammered into the usual human entropy, or equality.

This leaves us with a troublesome situation. Christianity is not, as Nietzsche alleges, the origin of liberalism, but its victim. It was however complicit in leading to the power of liberalism because of its focus on the individual. At this point, it becomes more of an “alternate reality” into which conservatives slip instead of addressing the world, perhaps a consequence of its dualistic view where the only perfection is found in heaven and Christians should simply wait for that instead of trying to get it right here in life.

Our real problem is the tendency of conservatives to throw up their hands at the world and go back to what they were doing. For over a century, they have been doing this. They rationalize that somehow the situation will work out, or that the Left will fall when its programs fail, or other ways of making an excuse and going back to work so they can pay the taxes that fund the State.

This is why many of us growing up in the 1980s ran from both conservatism and Christianity: the only people we saw who admitted to these beliefs were absolute morons or were moral weaklings who had permitted the situation to come about in the first place. You will not find many Generation Xers inside of a church or Republican convention for this reason. To us, these groups appeared as retards and liars.

One needs only to look at the lyrics to the only real Generation X artform, death metal and black metal, to see the rage at Christianity and conservatism explode. The broken wings of angels and desecration of all purity are popular topics. In the Gen X worldview, Christianity and conservatism were the forces holding us back while the world burned.

In particular, Christians and conservatives indulged in the illusion that everything in the world turns out just fine if all of us work hard at our boring jobs and pay those taxes. Just lie back and enjoy it, in other words. They said this because any actual rebellion would personally inconvenience them, and they were “Me Generation” too!

In our present time, many on the Alt Right think that a return to religion will save the West. This is also an illusion based on personal convenience. The West needs to bootstrap itself by ending the insanity and nurturing sanity, which is a bigger question than religion.

In fact, at first, it is oppositional to religion because people need to understand how nature and the world work before they seek a spiritual meaning, or they will end up in the same dualism that convinced their ancestors to do nothing while insanity took hold.

We need brutal realism. This takes a form that includes religion, but only in parallel with other vital institutions as expressed in the four pillars. Religion is not the cause; realism is the cause, and religion is one of the effects or methods and principles used to achieve the goal, which is a golden age of civilization.

To understand this, we need to go back to the pagan origins of Christianity. In this view, there is no Word, only variant interpretations of an ur-spirit that pervades all existence. This spirit is not oppositional to reality, as it is under dualism, but united with it or patterned in parallel to it, through a doctrine called monism.

This way, we can understand religion in its proper role: as a tool for understanding some aspects of reality, only in parallel with realism. It does not stand on its own. It is not a cause in itself. It is a means to an end, and that end is clarity about reality, both physical and metaphysical.

By doing so, we allow a space for religion — which more important than bringing comfort, brings joy to many — that does not allow it to subvert the rest of our needs and turn us into solipsistic individualists who shrug and go back to work instead of confronting vast social problems head-on.

Tags: , , , , ,

45 Responses to “Snapshot: The Problem Of Christianity”

  1. 1349 says:

    the tendency of conservatives to throw up their hands at the world and go back to what they were doing.

    Which is actually non-conservative behaviour, because it implies reliance on a system. I mean the whole system of laws, economy and administration in which we have our regulated roles. Any system is outdated the next second after it has been created, so there must be someone above the system who constantly changes (updates) it. If it is not updated, it quickly crumbles. So we must update things in order to conserve them. This implies the necessity of our constructive activity above the level of paid work / providing for our family.

    • Any system is outdated the next second after it has been created, so there must be someone above the system who constantly changes (updates) it.

      And, more importantly, resists idiotic “updates” from the rest of humanity. Good point however. To conserve, we must realize we cannot step into the same river twice and we are aiming at a moving target, which is why conservatives store it as principles and not methods.

  2. crow says:

    It is backwards to say Reality is separate from spirituality, and that Reality must precede spirituality. They are one and the same. Without spirituality, you’re as bonkers as everybody else.
    The words, of course, mean whatever you think they mean, and that is the problem.
    Which is why thinking is anathema to spirituality.
    Suspension of thinking must precede any genuine grasp of Reality/spirituality.
    Because in the mind, nothing is real.

    I carry a simple message, that is too simple to convey.
    Turn that mind off.
    If you can manage that, you’ll see why this is the message I carry.
    And fall about laughing at how simple it is.

    A functional society that works is one made up of functional people that work.
    People are mostly insane, and no bright idea or political plan is going to change that.

    • It is backwards to say Reality is separate from spirituality, and that Reality must precede spirituality. They are one and the same.

      Or rather, they are members of the same root. That is the essence of parallelism.

      Suspension of thinking must precede any genuine grasp of Reality/spirituality.
      Because in the mind, nothing is real.

      Sensations are equally suspicious.

  3. Avraham Rosenblum says:

    Nietzsche was not very fond of Christianity I think because of the reasons outlined in the above essay. Furthermore he pointed out some people use morality as a way to hide their real motivations.
    To me these critiques seem true but not sufficient. My brother once told me about abuses by religious people: “People are people are people.”

    See the essay of Blanshard a 20th century philosopher

    http://www.anthonyflood.com/blanshardcanmenbereasonable.htm

    • Nietzsche saw Christianity as nihilism: a type of pacifism that refuses to accept that struggle in life is necessary. Compare his writings to the first chapter of the Bhagavad-Gita and the warlike nature of the ancient in Nietzsche versus the modernized in contemporary interpretations of populist Christianity emerges. I look forward to reading the essay.

  4. Bruce Charlton says:

    Brett – Religion is neccessary, but not sufficient to save the West, and to make The West worth saving, which at present is not the case.

    We agree in the point that no earlier religion or social system will suffice, but my interpretation is that Christianity needed to evolve – because it contained fatal errors and flaws.

    Our current situation is becuase Men chose to reject their destiny, mostly motivated by sexuality which is, after reliogion, the second most powerful human motivation. The secular right remains in thrall to sex.

    So, my hope is to move forward into a new Christianity, the same message, but with a different metaphysical underpinning that makes it immune to the evil side of modernity (modernity being partly good, tradition being partly evil).

    • So, my hope is to move forward into a new Christianity, the same message, but with a different metaphysical underpinning that makes it immune to the evil side of modernity (modernity being partly good, tradition being partly evil).

      This makes sense to me. I think it is also worth re-iterating that this will need to be boostrapped, and exist in parallel with culture and our interpretation of science, which will need to be removed from the linear “populist” interpretation to more nuanced ones as existed centuries ago.

      For Christianity, I suggest that it can be re-understood by going to its roots and looking at those motivations and core assumptions. I have mentioned Eckhart, the Odyssey, the Bhagavad-Gita and the Aeneid, and those seem like reasonable starting points.

      I really enjoyed your recent analysis of Christian vitality here:
      http://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2016/10/this-mortal-life-in-context-of-eternity.html

  5. Avraham Rosenblum says:

    Christianity today is hard to defend. It would be a lot easier if we were to return to the Middle Ages and have to defend the Christianity of Aquinas or the or previous scholastics. While not Christian myself I would have to say that Aquinas is pretty good as a system.

  6. Finsals Collons says:

    (You might find Bruce Charlton’s ideas interesting. He also thinks that a pagan stage is needed before reviving Christianity, because paganism points to Christianity. It is difficult to go from secular humanism to Christianity because secular humanism is a faith explicitly built to destroy Christianity. )

    IMHO, I don’t think the problem is Christianity, the same way I don’t think the solution is only Christianity. As a Christian, I see my religion as a way of worshiping God, improve myself and deal with the spiritual realm, before and after death. Christianity is not meant to be a political tool, as Islam or secular humanism are. “My kingdom is not of this world” “Give to Caesar, etc, etc”. Its goal is higher and different.

    Having said that, we live in this world for the time being. Every culture has a religion, a worldview with a moral that distinguishes good from evil. This religion is codified in the law. (A religion does not need God, as in Buddhism, Daoism and Confucianism). Our culture has secular humanism (and its latest incarnation, political correctness) as its religion. Secular humanism is materialist and puts personal pleasure at the center. It is the “me” religion and all these lofty ideals (freedom, equality…) are only excuses to satisfy oneself.

    In our times, secular humanism impregnates everything. In Europe, its victory is evident. In America, even so-called Christianity is only secular humanism in disguise (with some exceptions). The hybridization of American Christianity with secular humanism comes from the XIX century, at least.

    The problem is secular humanism is a contradictory and self-destroying religion. It is not strange that decline of the West follows decline of Christianity to a T. It is simple: when you reject the truth, you start taking bad decisions and committing suicide. For example, Christianity (with other religions) opposed “free sex”. Well, you see what promiscuity and contraceptives have done to our culture (low birth rates, feminism, a welfare state on the brink of collapse, etc). When Christianity was the oficial faith of Western countries (long, longtime ago), you could oppose Muslim immigration because they were not Christian. For example, the Catholic Kings expelled Muslims from Spain. Now you can’t do that because the official theory is that all religions are allowed in the private realm while secular humanism rules the public realm (which is a secular humanist dogma). So you should allow the invasion.

    Although, as I said, Christianity is not of this world, there has been no thriving culture without a sane religion (not necessarily Christianity). A sane religion is necessary but not sufficient for a culture in this world to thrive. This is why my European country will end up being Islamic or Christian (probably the former), but secular humanism is a faith that destroys itself and its society. I don’t think my country will end up being pagan, because Western paganism is dead. I will believe Western paganism is a viable faith when I see a alt-right pagan making big sacrifices in his life to honor Thor, talking and making daily rituals to Thor and curbing his instincts to please Thor (the same I do for Christ). But I don’t know a Western person that proposes paganism that really believes it. They don’t really believe Thor or Zeus are out there. In our modern world, it is a fake faith and you can’t build anything based on that. This is why I think a revival of true Christianity is the only hope that the West has. This is still possible in America (where Muslim immigrants are still a minority), but Europe is lost.

  7. Finsals Collons says:

    I missed that. Apologies for the long explanation.

    By doing so, we allow a space for religion — which more important than bringing comfort, brings joy to many —

    You see here the hybridization of American Christianity with secular humanism. This idea is general in America. Religion must be allowed because it brings comfort and joy to many. You are mean to deny this comfort and joy (I have heard this from prominent American Christian figures)

    But this is a secular humanist version of Christianity.

    1) Christianity as a private and individualistic faith instead of the shared faith of a community, both private and public. This follows the secular humanist tenet that religions are private and secular humanism is public.

    2) Christianity as a means for joy, which is a secular humanist goal, because secular humanism is the “me” religion. But Christianity is not about that (although comfort and joy can be some byproducts). It is about serving God and truth, whatever it takes. As C.S.Lewis said: “if you want to be happy, don’t become Christian, grab a bottle of wine”

    There have been many times in my life when I had preferred not to be Christian. If I sacrifice myself for God, it is because I think this is the truth, not because it makes me happy. Currently it does not make me happy at all. If Christianity is only about “feeling good”, it is only secular humanism in disguise.

    I understand that this is not what you meant, but, by passing, you repeated this idea about religion bringing comfort and I wanted to comment on that.

    • It is about serving God and truth, whatever it takes.

      This is done because it brings joy. I do not see joy in the secular humanist view as “individual.” Joy comes from transcendental union with the cosmos and nature.

  8. AntiDem says:

    Another way to put it is that a return to a steely, scripture-based Christianity is necessary, but not in and of itself sufficient, to save the West. We can’t just return to Christianity, we must return to the right Christianity, practiced the right way, as part of a larger program of de-pozzing ourselves and beginning to live like actual human beings again.

    That said, anyone who would reject Christianity outright just because much of the practice of it in the modern day is pozzed, is as short-sighted as someone who would reject learning things just because modern schools and universities are pozzed. It’s possible to go from one undesirable extreme directly to the equally-undesirable opposite extreme: Pretending that nothing is wrong and wanting to close your font door to the troubles of the world (i.e. the “If I can’t see mommy, mommy can’t see me” approach) is unrealistic, but rebelling against everything and running to the metaphorical hills because you’ve decided to reject everything in the world is ham-fisted and immature.

    In the end, it really all comes down to us. If we’re smart and steely-spined, then, like Constantine’ soldiers at Milvian Bridge, the sign of Christ will save us – In Hoc Signo Vinces. If, however, we’re a bunch of spineless cucks, then nothing – no belief system, no religion, no philosophy, no politics, no black metal album – can save us.

    • JPW says:

      The pozz is death. It’s like nuclear fallout. Once it gets in you, you’re damaged goods. It requires a personal commitment to depozzing.

      • AntiDem says:

        Then we’d better get that commitment together, because if we don’t, we are all well and truly fucked. Name one thing in the Modern west that is not deeply infected with poz. Education? Law? Science? Literature? Music? Art? Business? Sports? Yet we can’t reject these things out of hand, just because they’re infected, otherwise our solution to the “poz problem” will involve us all going back to living in mud huts and pushing around wooden plows between barbarian invasions.

        • Yet we can’t reject these things out of hand, just because they’re infected, otherwise our solution to the “poz problem” will involve us all going back to living in mud huts and pushing around wooden plows between barbarian invasions.

          Which is where the greens ended up shortly before they cucked to the Left, and some way say, in order that they could cuck to the Left. Deep Ecology is a saner view: change lifestyles by building society around positive goals and practices.

    • NH says:

      Return to Pythagorean, Platonic or Neo-Platonic models over Christianity. Christianity, at its roots, makes no sense (Trinity logic is very goofy and has taken thousands of years to define, and still has never been defined well) and has had a long history of creating deficiencies in education, sciences, sex and more.

      To go further, if seeking a universal faith Mazdaism should be considers perhaps as well, as it links to the Platonic. Platonic being a meditation of Mazdan thought

      Culture that holds science, education and divinity as one growing being!

      Christianity, at its root, is a corporation. A power structure totally dependent on believer money.

      A true universal faith will never happen as the preferred method toward light and purpose of divinity will be different per person. A Platonic method would be much different than the Christian approach, and, I believe, would create a wiser healthier people, if aiming for universal. But the need for power, control, and narrative dominance will never allow ONE universal way.

      Folkways are perhaps the best and most honest return. The world should admit its differences and worship in a Folkway rather than aiming to unite. The need of unification often leads to war of differences.

    • It’s possible to go from one undesirable extreme directly to the equally-undesirable opposite extreme

      In fact, this is the most common outcome.

  9. NH says:

    You are commenting on a very tiny point in a much larger spiritual picture. Word of the Abrahamic vs no word of a Pagan system. So much more is occurring. Left hand approach to light vs right hand. Assimilation into light vs crafting toward light is huge. Catholicism as the first centralized business vs a zero currency practice. So many dimensions. And if taking just Greek or Roman branded paganism and you have even more differences because the lore was more embedded in the soil of civilization than the pagan of the North.

  10. Tony says:

    One of your best.
    Have seen many recently in denial of reality due to their believe that they need not get involved because they will be taken care of when they go to heaven.
    Liberal attitude.

    • Have seen many recently in denial of reality due to their believe that they need not get involved because they will be taken care of when they go to heaven.

      I find this attitude terrifying as well, and it reminds me why I started out as an anti-dualist: heaven may be there, but we need to fix things here now. Conservative dualists accept defeat and look for reward in heaven; liberal dualists turn toward progress because this world is misery and then self-destruct to get to heaven faster.

  11. 1349 says:

    it might make sense to view Christianity as a superior spiritual technology

    Any good (i.e. functional) religion is a technology. And not only a technology of mass management but also, and more importantly, a technology of personal growth (“enlightenment” in the Buddhist sense). It should lead “back to god”, reunite with the divine (see “re-ligare” etymologies), the latter being not some fancy personality or miraculous force but a superreality which is actually brutal from the viewpoint of us material beings but giving freedom.
    …So, going back to the notion of “technology”. A good christian is not someone who says “i’m christian because i believe in this and that and celebrate this and that and follow this and that rule”. Rather, it will be someone who says “i’m christian, which means i’ve mastered this and that objective (!) technique of seeing through things and connecting with the divine”. It’s like kung fu or something. A black belt / nidan in christianity (or other religion). =))
    Excuse this flow of conscience.

    • Rather, it will be someone who says “i’m christian, which means i’ve mastered this and that objective (!) technique of seeing through things and connecting with the divine”.

      That is a good point; religion based on understanding instead of advocacy would be a positive step. However, the exoteric nature of written religions makes this hard to maintain.

  12. Asian Reactionary says:

    My simplistic belief is that people largely need a belief system. It just so happens that the social justice religion is the new holiness. The Cult of Moloch and all.

    I’ve had the misfortune of having a few SJWs as former friends – I dare not call them friends anymore. There’s a few commonalities to find to their responses:

    1) the holy handwringing of being offended by people who do not share their beliefs(“its so terrible that someone doesn’t acknowledge a mutilated enunch as a woman! So disgusting!”)

    2) the sense of personal revelation of truth (“I discovered how much internalized my soggy knees I have! I thought that I was woke, but I am not yet progressive enough!”)

    3) the underlying belief that their world is the best of all possible worlds (“If someone woke up from the 1940s today, they would have to learn how to be a better person in a happier world for all.”)

    Alter a few things, and its essentially the same as any other fundamental religion.

    • The decisive factor, it seems to me, is that it is based in victimhood. This allows them to always claim persecution, and therefore, to demand recompense through equality.

    • My simplistic belief is that people largely need a belief system.

      I agree, and would add to that: social justice explains all human problems as victimhood, which lets people off the hook for fixing their own lives and makes scapegoating a normal practice. The inner human monkey loves that.

  13. Steel T Post says:

    Christianity is a “Jews First!” (Romans 1:16) perversion of Greek and pagan beliefs. What sort of White man wants to live forever in a fantastical Jewish capital city? What sort of White man refers to foreign soil, instead of ground upon which he trods, as “The Holy Land?”

    “Inside every Christian is a Jew.” -The Pope (2014)

    And lets not forget that Angela Merkel, leader of the Christian Democrats, daughter of a Lutheran minister, and member of the Evangelical Church in Berlin follows this Jewish advice to a tee:

    “Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you, Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you. And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloke forbid not to take thy coat also. Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.”

    More like Jesus she will ever be.

    Christianity is syncretic pagan punch bowl with a Jewish turd in it. Sure, the punch has all sorts of tasty ingredients. But you still have to throw out the whole batch of punch. (((Paul))) gives a hint why: “A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.” And a little Skype shit ruineth the whole punch bowl.

    No White man needs a Jewish savior.

    • Steel T Post says:

      When I write of ancient “Greek and pagan beliefs” that Christianity borrowed, I mean that in this context:

      “[T]hey perform their ritual, and persuade not only individuals, but whole cities, that expiations and atonements for sin may be made by sacrifices and amusements which fill a vacant hour, and are equally at the service of the living and the dead; the latter sort they call mysteries, and they redeem us from the pains of hell, but if we neglect them no one knows what awaits us.”

      –Plato (4th century BCE) The Republic. (Book II)
      http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/republic.html

      Sound familiar? All of these pagan evangelical concepts are in the Bible, with a Jewish savior inserted by the Afterlife-in-Jerusalem™ Merchants.

      But who really believes in a magical afterlife these days, anymore than people believe in the thunder god Thor?

      • In my experience, more people are turning to religion, but the Leftist and “pop” nature of most Christianity repels them. Christianity worked because it was Europeanized, but then those European instincts were lost to the Word. At that point, the Crowdists infested it and took over.

        • NH says:

          Leftists are aiming for secular atheism altogether. They are aiming for a life unattached to divine law. You should return to any religion that understands divine law. Rta, Asha, Tyr, Zues, Jupiter, Aristotle, Plato. Each understand the balance of choices. You can’t argue against poor choice. Oddly the religions of Abraham have borrowed from these concepts but never seal the deal in their logic. The sin ‘thou shall not kill’ is a good example of confusion.

          This election is a good example of Tyr. Justice through battle.

          • They are aiming for a life unattached to divine law.

            And anything else larger than the individual, which is why their psychology is individualism and their method is collectivized individualism.

      • There is a reason that once we taught the Aeneid and Odyssey in every high school. It showed us the roots of our belief.

        What you identify as Jewish parts of Christianity seem to me to be pagan ideas simplified and sexed up. This is why they are more emotionally effective.

    • “Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you, Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you. And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloke forbid not to take thy coat also. Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.”

      This is my least favorite part of Christianity. Anytime pacifism appears, it is palliative care before death.

  14. Avraham Rosenblum says:

    I have been looking at Christianity in the USA for some time and it looks like it has a lot of cults and fuzzy thinking. No wonder the Left is winning.

    • First the Left won in the churches. The forefront of virtue signaling was occupied by the Christians before the Leftists.

      However, as Plato tells us, in democracy people tend to be flighty and prone to fuzzy thinking. This is most likely what subverted Christianity.

      America also suffers from having rejected our heritage in common, WASP-ness, because that carries on tradition where dogma cannot. For example, the healthiest churches around here are the German Lutherans, mostly for the German (to which the Lutheran is an afterthought, much like Christianity itself, as the bulk of their teaching is German culture).

  15. KsytriaKhalsa says:

    To understand this, we need to go back to the pagan origins of Christianity. In this view, there is no Word, only variant interpretations of an ur-spirit that pervades all existence. This spirit is not oppositional to reality, as it is under dualism, but united with it or patterned in parallel to it, through a doctrine called monism.

    So basically, you need to become Sikhs.

  16. A non-Roman Catholic pagan-Christianity might fly in Europe with the New Right https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0195104668/ref=dp_olp_all_mbc?ie=UTF8&condition=all (whereas the Christian esoterism of Jakob Boehme / Angelus Silesius / Meister Eckhart is only understood by few), but America is too rooted in British Puritanism for that to work here for the majority Alt-Right I believe.

    A great awakening of American Christians to repenting of their evanjellyfish-iness (the folly of political correctness and wait-til-Christ-does-something Pre-Millennialism) is needed for sure.

  17. tradCatthecat says:

    Furthermore about British Puritanism and all exoteric Protestantism for that matter; their main problem lies in their focus on the Pauline epistles and seeing them primarily as a list of rules, which misses the mark and which St. Peter himself warned about in his 2nd epistle chapter 3 verse 16: “those who are ignorant and unstable have twisted his [Paul’s] letters to mean something quite different, just as they do with other parts of Scripture. And this will result in their destruction.” https://www.blueletterbible.org/nlt/2pe/3/16/t_conc_1159016 The Greek Orthodox Church and the Wesleyan Protestants have always focused on the Johannine epistles, Meister Eckhart did the same, and from their history one can see the better fruits that resulted from that.

    • Interesting. To my mind, when people start making lists of rules, they are already without direction. It means they have mistaken detail for major point and in doing so, lost that bigger picture focus.

  18. […] Charlton cited a recent Amerika post as a means of continuing his ongoing discussion into future Christianity as a pivot point on which […]

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>